CMR on the move

[AV8700]

So when the say 25 more 70 seaters, does that mean they keep the current fleet the same size add 25 new 70 seat aircraft. or does it mean you get 25 new 70 seaters and we quietly get rid of 25 OLD 50 seaters resulting in very little grow and just a aircraft swap from 50 to 70 seaters???

I don't think they are guaranteed anything except the possibility of growth. Delta
already knows where the aircraft are going. Was there an RFP? FB has been there two weeks and came up with all this? Horse caca! Say no, you'll still get the aircraft.

 

[DDpaysoff]

I spent way too much time in ops today and some of the details are that new hires would NOT be stuck on 1st year pay. When they reach the 1 year mark they would increase to 2nd year pay and then be frozen. Also, there is a sunset clause in the freeze that cancels it June 2007 when the contract becomes ammendable. The MEC is meeting tomorrow to go over the proposal. Hopefully, we'll get a better idea of the details early next week.

Interesting stuff there caveman. Tell me is the shaved head rumor true?

 

[XRMEFLYER]

So when the say 25 more 70 seaters, does that mean they keep the current fleet the same size add 25 new 70 seat aircraft. or does it mean you get 25 new 70 seaters and we quietly get rid of 25 OLD 50 seaters resulting in very little grow and just a aircraft swap from 50 to 70 seaters???

Therein lies the rub!

 

[sleeve]

yeah, we're probably all gonna get screwed.... we'll still get new aircraft just like last time, its all a ploy...same song and dance just now its a different tune....last time they were talking pay cuts/bene. cuts etc..now its just a pay freeze, which FO's are gonna have anyway cause our agreement only goes out 5 years..

Its states plain as day..if we don't get aircraft we go back to original pay scale, which will be a whole 2 bucks tops and another eternity as an FO... the nuts and bolts of the deal hasn't even been presented yet and some of us are already doom and gloom..there doesn't have to be an RFP everytime aircraft are possibly going some where..FB has already told most of middle management that there is a possibilty of shrinkage (and not the cold water kind)..if we don't make some changes soon...after the last RFP we all said "we'll get A/C" well I've moved up a whole 4 or 5 numbers since.

we're talking a few bucks a year for the next 2-3 years then we can negotiate something else...and some of us will have something to look forward sometime before we all turn out to be ten year FO's at a regional!!

 

[av8tor4239]

So when the say 25 more 70 seaters, does that mean they keep the current fleet the same size add 25 new 70 seat aircraft. or does it mean you get 25 new 70 seaters and we quietly get rid of 25 OLD 50 seaters resulting in very little grow and just a aircraft swap from 50 to 70 seaters???

Excellent point.. Here at ASA we are getting 25 new jets, but losing 18 ATR's.. So much for the growth.

 

[doh]

Hold on there sleevey dear. I'm not doom and gloom. I just don't want to have the same experience I've had every other time I've jumped right in to some management proposal. It starts with, "well, that's not how we interpret the agreement." The next thing you know, some F/O ( now who would that be ) is complaining because the agreement he jumped right into has left him in the right seat at a regional for the last ten years. Let's take the time to make sure we are getting the real deal. Bait and switch and out right lies are management's bread and butt(rell)er.

 

[bvt1151]

All the union has to do is write into the agreement that if a net gain of 10 50-seaters or greater, and 25 70-seaters or greater does not take place by a certain date, the pay reverts back.

That solves all of your conspiracy issues.

 

[Smacktard]

Excellent point.. Here at ASA we are getting 25 new jets, but losing 18 ATR's.. So much for the growth.

So a quote from a mechanic is now fact? When did that happen?

 

[anon]

E-170 or CRJ700 - who cares

The E-170 is a better airplane for the pax than the CRJ-700, no doubt.

However --- I get paid by MY seat, not the pax. Quite honestly, I could care less if the airplane was a CRJ700 or an E-170 as long as the pay is right.

Give me an airplane that performs well, doesn't break, and is comfortable and user-friendly to me - pay me for that airplane - and I'll be happy in either aircraft.

 

[711-24-7]

Excellent point.. Here at ASA we are getting 25 new jets, but losing 18 ATR's.. So much for the growth.

Last I heard was we are only getting rid of 7 ATR's where is this rumore of losing 18 out of 19 ATR's coming from?........... And why 18 not all of them and how one can prove it. Well I guess I will believe it when I see it.

 

[Caveman]

Yes, supposedly the shaved head bit is true, but I didn't ask anyone about it. The other stuff I did ask about and they are a part of the proposal.

 

[C425Driver]

Caveman,

What's the shaved head rumor?

 

[chperplt]

I heard the shaved head offer was made during the meeting FB had with the crew members.. Senior pilots can shave him bald if this passes.

 

[wrigley23]

After reading all the replies I still am not sure whether or not the so called freeze on longevity increases is applied to the annual contract raises or the individual pilot anniversary increase. Since the contract raises end after June this year, will the 2005 rate go into effect if an aircraft is delivered?

So if a new 50 seater is delivered in June, all the junior FOs will be frozen at $38 for no less than 2 years until 2007? Why would any junior captain go for this either? Maybe the prospect of getting off reserve is enticing enough. I do see a rift between some junior and senior guys happening, but I guess thats inevitable.

Interesting next couple of weeks.

 

[Heavy Set]

The E-170 is a better airplane for the pax than the CRJ-700, no doubt.

However --- I get paid by MY seat, not the pax. Quite honestly, I could care less if the airplane was a CRJ700 or an E-170 as long as the pay is right.

Give me an airplane that performs well, doesn't break, and is comfortable and user-friendly to me - pay me for that airplane - and I'll be happy in either aircraft.

Having talked to an MDA pilot who has flown both - the E170 is preferred by far in his opinion. Better avionics, wider cockpit, more of a "big airplane" feel to it. Sure some pilots don't care so long as they're paid appropriately. But if given the choice, the E170 seems like a nicer ride (I can confirm that as a pax)...

 

[sleeve]

DOH,


I get what your saying..I'm not saying we jump right into this and sign our names in blood...The things that are most important...(new hire pay, what if we don't get very many planes very fast, or none at all etc...) those are the things that we have to make very clear with any opening of the contract..the wording has to be right and any loopholes that managment can jump through have to be closed up...but there are guys nitpicking every little thing and trying to negotiate for different things that don't pertain to the issue at hand.

I feel if we don't atleast make a very good attempt at this, I'll be an FO here for 10 years anyway...So I am willing to give a little, I don't think I'll miss the 150 dollars it adds up to.. There are already guys ,who haven't seen the proposal, saying heii no...merely for the fact they don't trust anyone, they think we'll be ok, or they don't care because they are where they want to be.

 

[Tim47SIP]

Don"t blow it!

There are limits on what we are willing to negotiate, but if we are to have any hope for the future of our profession, we need these airframes on our property (or ASA's property) and NOT the contract carrier whores who cheerfully underbid us by 10-45%. Immagine being in negotiations in 2006 (or 2007, will it really matter?) with CHQ taking delivery of their 100th DCI 70 seater at our sub 40 seat pay rates.

That is exactly what will happen! Remember Mesa picked up the 25-75 seaters from U S Air when U's MEC was upholding the industry due to aircraft weight and not seats? Mesa quickly scarfed up those 75 seaters and is flying them for U while their pilots who were supposed to fly them lost out. Yep, they showed management alright! I think it is much wiser to get the airframes on the property then work on QOL issues and money. This way they can't be dangled at you during your next negotiations. Some of the chest thumpers on here need to figure out their priorities in regards to what is easily doable with minimal expediture and what is not easily doable with increased expenditure.

I personally think that FB is trying to be honest. He did what Skip should have done a long time ago. He has not asked for any reduction in pay. That is NOT a consesseion. 35 airframes means 175 upgrades and 175 FO's moving up or getting off of reserves. Than is QOL right there. Big time pay increase from FO to Cpt, Cpt's getting better lines, etc.. Holding out for roughly 1000 dollars per year raises in lue of this needed growth is assenine at best. Make sure the contract is worded so there can not be any way that a partial delivery will fullfill the contract. All or back to original pay schedules.

I also am wondering about ASA's hiring increasing to 50 month in March time frame. I know we don't need that many for the aircraft we have scheduled, so what gives? I have been told that Delta wanted to put all of the 70's under one roof. Possibly, Comair could get all E-170's for their 70 seaters and ASA pick up Comairs CL-700's. Who knows, all I know is that airframe increases DO increase QOL and Pay. Get those first then worry about the dollar and hour raise.

I also think this is a positive thing for ASA as it keeps Comair at their present "leading industry rates". This means that Delta possibly wont go after wage decreases which helps ASA in negotiations. We now have a firm line to negotiate to, approved by JG. The only problem that I can see with the negotiations is that our current CASM is slightly higher than Comairs which might make it difficult for any real wage increases. Aircraft growth seems to be the best way for now.

 

[Flying Horses]

Taking a pay freeze (aka concession) would be a dangerous thing. Comair's "industry-leading" contract would not be one (at least for pay rates) in 2 1/2 years when Comair can start negotiating. Comair's pay then will be right at the level of virtually all other regional carriers.

Then, when Comair starts to work on their new contract, the negotiation of pay rates will then start at these lower (frozen) pay scales, instead of what they would be if there were normal annual and longevity raises. Comair will cease to be the highest paid regional, and thus "lower the bar" for everyone elses negotiating.

To put this in perspective, let's take a 7-year 50 seat CHQ and Comair captain. Now, the CHQ captain gets $67/hour, while the Comair captain gets $72/hour. 2 1/2 years go by, the CHQ captain is getting $78/hour (with annual DOS and longevity increases), while the Comair captain is still getting $72/hour. This also works with 70 seat pay: now $70/hour vs. $80/hour ... in 2 1/2 years, $82/hour vs. $80/hour.

Thus, in the middle of 2007, when Comair starts negotiating, management will say, 10 year captains are now making $72/hour and $80/hour for 50 seats and 70 seats, respectively, and offer probably a 2-3% raise from those rates. The final negotiated pay rates will never even equal what Comair pilots would have been making if a pay freeze were never established. And Comair will then be just an average-paid regional carrier.

 

[InclusiveScope]

There are limits on what we are willing to negotiate, but if we are to have any hope for the future of our profession, we need these airframes on our property (or ASA's property) and NOT the contract carrier whores who cheerfully underbid us by 10-45%. Immagine being in negotiations in 2006 (or 2007, will it really matter?) with CHQ taking delivery of their 100th DCI 70 seater at our sub 40 seat pay rates.

That is exactly what will happen! Remember Mesa picked up the 25-75 seaters from U S Air when U's MEC was upholding the industry due to aircraft weight and not seats? Mesa quickly scarfed up those 75 seaters and is flying them for U while their pilots who were supposed to fly them lost out. Yep, they showed management alright! I think it is much wiser to get the airframes on the property then work on QOL issues and money. This way they can't be dangled at you during your next negotiations. Some of the chest thumpers on here need to figure out their priorities in regards to what is easily doable with minimal expediture and what is not easily doable with increased expenditure.

I personally think that FB is trying to be honest. He did what Skip should have done a long time ago. He has not asked for any reduction in pay. That is NOT a consesseion. 35 airframes means 175 upgrades and 175 FO's moving up or getting off of reserves. Than is QOL right there. Big time pay increase from FO to Cpt, Cpt's getting better lines, etc.. Holding out for roughly 1000 dollars per year raises in lue of this needed growth is assenine at best. Make sure the contract is worded so there can not be any way that a partial delivery will fullfill the contract. All or back to original pay schedules.

I also am wondering about ASA's hiring increasing to 50 month in March time frame. I know we don't need that many for the aircraft we have scheduled, so what gives? I have been told that Delta wanted to put all of the 70's under one roof. Possibly, Comair could get all E-170's for their 70 seaters and ASA pick up Comairs CL-700's. Who knows, all I know is that airframe increases DO increase QOL and Pay. Get those first then worry about the dollar and hour raise.

I also think this is a positive thing for ASA as it keeps Comair at their present "leading industry rates". This means that Delta possibly wont go after wage decreases which helps ASA in negotiations. We now have a firm line to negotiate to, approved by JG. The only problem that I can see with the negotiations is that our current CASM is slightly higher than Comairs which might make it difficult for any real wage increases. Aircraft growth seems to be the best way for now.

Well said Tim! I agree.

IMO, management has won this round. We allowed ourselves to compete with each other rather than bargain collectively. We need to "regain the flying" and then try to move the bar forward.

Allowing the competion to happen, while standing on the sidelines cursing it, is not a solution. It is time for some new thinking, not more useless sticker slogans.

Competion is a bitch - we must deal with it!

 

[bvt1151]

My hat is off to both Tim and Inclusive. You first have to gain control of the assets, and then negotiate your future. Right now there is no real control of the assets.